• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
LebanonIran
Winners and Losers: Impact of the Doha Round on Developing Countries
Report

Winners and Losers: Impact of the Doha Round on Developing Countries

This report presents a new, path breaking model of global trade as a tool to analyze the potential impacts of the negotiations and underlying economic interests of the WTO’s diverse members.

Link Copied
By Ms. Sandra Polaski
Published on Mar 13, 2006

Additional Links

Full Text PDF (Color)Full Text PDF (Black and White)

Source: Carnegie Endowment

Meeting in Hong Kong in December 2005, trade ministers from World Trade Organization member countries were unable to bridge major disagreements in virtually every area of the Doha Round negotiations. As the global trade regime has expanded to include most developing countries, the range of divergent priorities within the negotiations has widened. What would it take to produce a global trade agreement that addresses the interests of developing countries and holds the potential to lift their incomes, while at the same time offering advantages for developed countries?

Winners and Losers: Impact of the Doha Round on Developing Countries presents a new, path breaking model of global trade as a tool to analyze the potential impacts of the negotiations and underlying economic interests of the WTO’s diverse members.  This new Carnegie model makes several critical innovations—notably, modeling unemployment in developing countries and separating agricultural labor markets from urban unskilled labor markets.  The result is a thorough, detailed, and more accurate analysis of the impact of trade policies on both developing and developed countries.

The report’s major findings are striking: any of the plausible trade scenarios will produce only modest gains for the world; agricultural trade is not a panacea for most poor countries; the poorest countries may actually lose from any agreement; and additional special measures will be needed to ensure that the least developed countries succeed.  The full document includes technical specifications of the Carnegie model, simulation results, a wealth of regional and national data, over 50 full color charts and graphs, policy implications and recommendations.

What people are saying about Winners and Losers: Policymakers and journalists have commented on the results of the Carnegie model.  Click on the links below to read their responses:

  • Editorial, New York Times: "What Development Round?"
  • Bruce Stokes, Columnist, The National Journal: "Doha's Winners and Losers"
  • John Judis, Senior Editor, The New Republic: "The WTO Miscalculates: Trade Imbalance"
  • Commissioner Peter Mandelson, European Union Trade Commissioner: Speech, March 21, 2006 
  • European Commission press release: "EU welcomes Carnegie research on development in Doha talk"
  • Ambassador Robert Portman, United States Trade Representative: USTR Press Release

Click on one of the links above for the full text of this Carnegie report.

Sandra Polaski is senior associate and director of the Trade, Equity, and Development Project at the Carnegie Endowment. She served as the U.S. secretary of state's special representative for international labor affairs from 1999 to 2002, playing a leading role in the development of U.S. government policy on international labor and trade issues.
 

About the Author

Ms. Sandra Polaski

Former Senior Associate, Director, Trade, Equity and Development Program

Until April 2002, Polaski served as the U.S. Secretary of State’s Special Representative for International Labor Affairs, the senior State Department official dealing with such matters.

    Recent Work

  • Report
    Brazil in the Global Economy: Measuring the Gains From Trade
      • +4

      Ms. Sandra Polaski, Joaquim Bento de Souza Ferreir, Janine Berg, …

  • Article
    One Cheer for Global Trade Talks

      Ms. Sandra Polaski

Ms. Sandra Polaski
Former Senior Associate, Director, Trade, Equity and Development Program
Sandra Polaski
North AmericaUnited StatesSouth AmericaChinaPolitical ReformEconomyTrade

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    New Syria, Old Lebanon: Absence of the State

    Any move by the United States to make good on Trump’s suggestion that Washington persuade Damascus to confront Hezbollah militarily would have catastrophic consequences. 

      Kheder Khaddour

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Lebanon Should Try to Place Hezbollah on the U.S.-Iran Table

    As talks begin between Washington and Tehran, Beirut has an opening to advance a regional plan for the party’s disarmament.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Board Up Donald Trump’s Failed Board of Peace

    What is behind Marco Rubio’s announcement that the body is now an international nongovernmental organization?

      • Zaha Hassan

      Zaha Hassan

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Looking Past the Wall on Palestine-Israel

    Policy discussion is ignoring that the Palestinian national project is hollowed out and apartheid is a present danger.

      Nathan J. Brown

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Israel’s Security Means Insecurity in the Middle East

    As negotiations with Iran and Lebanon continue, chaos is at the heart of the Netanyahu government’s calculations.

      Michael Young

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.